Say it's not so!
no it doesn't.
OCK posts:
lula posts:And guess what back? This doesn't prove one iota that the universe is billions of years old.
OCK POSTS:
"Data... that proves" you say? Even the Theory of Relavity isn't fully understood or agreed upon.
Turns out there are still plenty of mysteries as to even how light reaches earth. Does it travel to earth through curved space? Does it occur in slow motion? Even the red shift/Doppler effect isn't fully understood with certainity. If aspects such as these cannot be understood beyond doubt, even with the latest sophisticated tools and methodologies, science is still trying to figure our cosmology out.
Here's what I know. Scripture cannot err, whether in matters spiritual, physical, soteriological or historical. Science on the other hand, operates with one devestating handicap....as I just pointed out, it's history is riddled with the overturning of one theory after another; with one popular belief after another, some of which were thought to be with "data ....that proves".
Given that no theory is ever 100% proven, much less 100% agreed upon, it'll be a cold day in your Hell before science will be able to claim the same degree of certainty that you so casually embrace for the Bible. At least science changes & refines our understanding as new facts become known, unlike...
Thanks, and yes...the ostrich approach doesn't work.
KFC:
OCK:
You're prophetic Ock,haha.
So you're telling me that scripture, written by falliabl man, through his falliable perception - the same man mind you that can be falliable with science - who is known to have sinned, translated/transcribed (and doing both is difficult) be corrupted, be biased/slanted/subjective, assinine, et al.....is perfect?
Yup, you're right, scripture is perfect. No way in the world that it could anyother ways. Lets play ostrich.
Lula, if you're so sure that there is no proof - then give us your theory. Because it sounds like you're saying that just because the ages have gotten larger (oddly enough, NOT smaller)...that that means they're wrong or catchy.
~Alderic
Huh? Not quite Ock?
I posted and you responded and totally mentioned nothing regarding the scientific data I presented.
You just spooged the same crud Lula did. It's quite valid, and quite why there is a 50 million year margin of error. That doesn't change the fact that even with a 50 million year margin of error, many things are dated way beyond 10,000 years. And what of the speed of light? You don't find it miraculous and worthy of praising God that we can see a mni galaxy inside of our own that is 25,000 light years away?
If I were a deist, I'd be singing praises of the coolness of the universe. You just stick your head in the sand because that reality doesn't fit with your world view.
that's your answer to my refuting you Ock? Pretty sad.
You can date things any which way you want, doesn't mean it's correct. I've put on my JU profile that I'm 88 years old. I'm not. People lie about all sorts of things, lying about age is quite common.
As far as light years....you're aware that the Christians believe that everything was created with age right? Adam and Eve were not babies when they were created. The animals were created as fully developed and the brand new universe was set in place with age as well.
Well I'm not a deist and I DO sing the praises of the coolness of the universe. There you go with the insults again. I'll refrain. Instead I'd like to tell you a story. I wrote it out with you in mind and even included you in it.
Check it out:
http://kfc.joeuser.com/article/357451/The_Christian_and_the_Agnostic
I checked it out. It's cute!
Uh uh. No you don't. One of the qualities of the universe is that it's 13.7 billion years old. To sing the praises of it would be, at the least, to recognize its scope. Studying the universe DOES make one consider God. It does me, anyway. But it isn't a God that destroys, and it isn't a God that plays mind games by making everything that's older than 10,000 years look like it's really billions. I think you may be confusing God with Satan.
If I were Satan, and I had to figure out the best possible way to blind everyone to the truth, I would invent religion. Hands down the best blinder ever created AND people pay for it. Classic. Well done, Satan!
hmmmm couldn't it be our dating system isn't exactly totally accurate? God doesn't play mind games, people do.
Good! That's a start.
says who? You? Depends on who you ask.
and I agree with you. Surprised? I'm not a religionist. Man made religion has done alot of harm in getting the message across. That being said, there still is a remnant out there who are faithfully preaching the truth.
I know quite well that Satan puts on a three piece suit and walks down the aisle on Sundays. Have you ever read Genesis Chap 11? That's the beginning of false worship and he was right there behind it all. Right there, he was trying to unite people to worship God, his way not God's way.
a la (man made) Christianity?
Be well, ~Alderic
no, there's a diff. There is a religion that deals with the externals and there is a relationship with the God who has revealed himself to us and deals with the internal. That was what the whole discussion was about between Nicodemous and Jesus in John 3 about being born again.
You can be religious to your fingertips, like Nick was, but totally lost when it comes to the matter and purpose of God.
There is the physical world and then there is the spiritual world. The physical is at emnity with the spiritual. To become part of the earthly family one is physically born into it. To be born into the Family of God again one has to be born into it but this time spiritually. Christ came and said two things especially related to this.....one, we must be born again to see the kingdom of God, and two, he must be lifted up to make this happen by erasing sin and death from our lives.
The world is lost including many religious folk. The only answer is belief in the one who can save us and this involves trust and commitment in the only one who can.
Yet, the point is there is no empirical proof that this number is correct. Like it or not, believe it or not, radiometic dating is not 100% accurate when it comes to dating how old rocks are. At best, all we can say is that 13.7 billion years old is just the latest number evolutionist scientists have come up with at the moment.
Second point is that long ages of time cannot prove stellar evolution.
Third point is that long ages of time cannot produce stellar evolution.
Absolutely. Who can look up into the awe and wonder of the created universe and not wonder where did it come from.
We get the answer to this question from Genesis 1:1 .... "In the beginning, God created heaven and earth" ....v. 3, "And God said, 'Be light made.' And light was made."
Fom this, we get our starting point as far as knowing "time" and age of the universe and all that's in it.
I already explained this. The error percentage is built in. Even if it were as wrong as it could possibly be, some things still measure as way over 10k years. For this to not be true, and for you to be right, God would have to have deliberately made things look different than they are. That seems to me dishonest. I can't imagine a dishonest omnipotent, omniscient being.
Maybe the Christian god IS correct, KFC. But that isn't spoiled if the bible is not correct. And that is a WAY simpler solution than trying to suggest that a universe as vast as this was made to fool us into thinking it is one thing when it's actually something else.
Well it is a problem because if God is God and he reveals himself to us thru this word then he would protect his word as well. This word was written to all mankind. Some day I believe we will be judged according to it. It trandsends time. It's just as reliable and applicable today as it was three hundred years ago. The only diff today is, we've changed, not the word. The world has drifted further and further away but that doesn't negate what was written one iota.
Now, that's not saying that we, as Christians can't have error in our dating somewhere but I don't think it could be off all that much, certainly not billions of years. The bible doesn't give us any specific dates for the beginning of the world. All we can do is go backwards and put the dates in place. Bishop James Ussher (1600's) published a chronology that pointed to a time of creation as 4004 B.C. using the geneologies in scripture. Most that have come after Ussher have agreed this seems to be about right.
There is nothing in the bible thus far that has been proven incorrect. It's been verified thousands of times over and has stood the test of time quite well.